Reported Sexual Assault at Armstrong's House Under Investigation

[Thanks_Tom RR]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Not stating if I think anyone is guilty or not. I do have one question that if I heard it right I am not sure I understand.

 

The female mentioned that the rape happened between the hours of 2:30 sunday morning to 9:30 am. Why could she not narrow a time better down better than 7 hours?

 

If I misheard, please correct me.

It could have happened while she was asleep, then she woke up and figured out what happened. Or since they were at a party alcohol may have been involved.

I never buy that as an excuse. If you choose to drink then you need to understand that the things you do while under the influence may or may not be agreeable to you when you sober up, but it was YOUR decision to drink so you get to live with the consequences of your actions. (When I use the word you in this post, I don't necessarily mean you Moiraine.)

Elf, just no. Maybe the way she was dressed, "she was just asking for it" too? No.

If she says yes while drunk, or even because she was drunk, when she sobers up it doesn't become rape. And no I was not implying that by drinking that she was "asking for it".

 

*Edit* I've heard some information within the last 12 hours that leads me to believe this. That's all I'm saying.

You said "it was YOUR decision to drink so you get to live with the consequences of your actions". This is disgusting to hear, and honestly, if that is how you feel, I am ashamed for you.

 

You are now saying that agreeing to sex while drunk gives the women no legal rights. However, consent cannot be given by someone who is mentally incapable or physically helpless, including as a result of alcohol. You want consequences for actions, well don't sleep with someone who is drunk; otherwise, you can live with the consequences when they sober up.

Living with the consequences of our decisions to drink alcohol goes far beyond a choice to partake of sexual activities. We could list example after example of bad choices that are made while under the influence of alcohol and in the vast majority of cases we still hold those people accountable for their actions.

 

I think it goes without saying that someone who is mentally incapable or physically helpless cannot give consent. These would be obvious exceptions to the above.

 

Oh, in regards to your last sentence, what happens when they are both drunk and make bad decisions, what then?

Simple, then both have legal rights. Of course, the woman may file for rape (which requires penetration) while the man may file for sexual assault.

 

Consequences for actions. You keep saying that, but clearly, you have a double standard in this situation, for whatever reason.

[rdwoodpecker]

 

Not stating if I think anyone is guilty or not. I do have one question that if I heard it right I am not sure I understand.

 

The female mentioned that the rape happened between the hours of 2:30 sunday morning to 9:30 am. Why could she not narrow a time better down better than 7 hours?

 

If I misheard, please correct me.

It could have happened while she was asleep, then she woke up and figured out what happened. Or since they were at a party alcohol may have been involved.

 

Well I would find it very hard to believe that she was just asleep and not wake up. I could by the "passed out" theory better.

[dvdcrr]

I detect a slight amount of stalling here... getting ahead of the timeline questions with statements such as dna takes months. That tells me whoever is involved is dear to the program.

[Elf]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Not stating if I think anyone is guilty or not. I do have one question that if I heard it right I am not sure I understand.

 

The female mentioned that the rape happened between the hours of 2:30 sunday morning to 9:30 am. Why could she not narrow a time better down better than 7 hours?

 

If I misheard, please correct me.

It could have happened while she was asleep, then she woke up and figured out what happened. Or since they were at a party alcohol may have been involved.

I never buy that as an excuse. If you choose to drink then you need to understand that the things you do while under the influence may or may not be agreeable to you when you sober up, but it was YOUR decision to drink so you get to live with the consequences of your actions. (When I use the word you in this post, I don't necessarily mean you Moiraine.)

Elf, just no. Maybe the way she was dressed, "she was just asking for it" too? No.

If she says yes while drunk, or even because she was drunk, when she sobers up it doesn't become rape. And no I was not implying that by drinking that she was "asking for it".

 

*Edit* I've heard some information within the last 12 hours that leads me to believe this. That's all I'm saying.

You said "it was YOUR decision to drink so you get to live with the consequences of your actions". This is disgusting to hear, and honestly, if that is how you feel, I am ashamed for you.

 

You are now saying that agreeing to sex while drunk gives the women no legal rights. However, consent cannot be given by someone who is mentally incapable or physically helpless, including as a result of alcohol. You want consequences for actions, well don't sleep with someone who is drunk; otherwise, you can live with the consequences when they sober up.

Living with the consequences of our decisions to drink alcohol goes far beyond a choice to partake of sexual activities. We could list example after example of bad choices that are made while under the influence of alcohol and in the vast majority of cases we still hold those people accountable for their actions.

 

I think it goes without saying that someone who is mentally incapable or physically helpless cannot give consent. These would be obvious exceptions to the above.

 

Oh, in regards to your last sentence, what happens when they are both drunk and make bad decisions, what then?

Simple, then both have legal rights. Of course, the woman may file for rape (which requires penetration) while the man may file for sexual assault.

 

Consequences for actions. You keep saying that, but clearly, you have a double standard in this situation, for whatever reason.

 

Where is my double standard?

[Mike Mcdee]

I detect a slight amount of stalling here... getting ahead of the timeline questions with statements such as dna takes months. That tells me whoever is involved is dear to the program.

For some reason I cannot see the LPD dragging their feet on this just to appease the football team. The cover up is almost always more egregious than the actual crime. Usually more people are at risk if there is a cover up and the cover ups almost always come out. I'm not sure why the prosecution would be waiting on DNA evidence to charge if both parties admit there was sex, rape or no. If the prosecution believes they have enough evidence to charge, then I would believe they would.

 

With the discussion on the alcohol and consent, I'm going to be as delicate as I can. As a man, you have to think about if had happened to you. You got drunk at a party. Things seem really fuzzy the next morning. You are a little "sore". You good with what happened to you? Are you going to chalk it up to "Man I got really s-faced last night and something bad happened to me. I won't be doing that again."? Are you excited to go tell the authorities what was done to you? Of course not. You are going to be pissed you were violated and probably a little embarrassed.

[BigWillie]

I detect a slight amount of stalling here... getting ahead of the timeline questions with statements such as dna takes months. That tells me whoever is involved is dear to the program.

 

No.

[TAKODA]

While I will not add to the already long laundry list of rumors, I will speak to the "why" a DNA test may possibly be important in an investigation.

 

Note! I am not speaking to this case at all, but in general terms only.

 

In cases that involve numerous parties, it is quite possible that consensual sex between "any number of individuals" could be a fact; however if the alleged victim was under the influence whereby the alleged victim was incapacitated to a degree where alleged victim was not in control, and if after having consensual sex, alleged victim was sexually assaulted by some perpetrator and that perpetrator was to deny they had sex with alleged victim, this very well could be the crux of the matter.

 

Again, I am not speaking to this case but it was posed by someone earlier as to why a DNA test might be important. It also could be that once a rape claim is committed, it is the protocol that agency elects to follow.

[Bowfin]

For some reason I cannot see the LPD dragging their feet on this just to appease the football team.

 

I can, but only because I had relatives on the football team and relatives who ran afoul of the football team, and one other friend who had to testify against a coach in a drinking while driving case.

[NUance]

 

While I will not add to the already long laundry list of rumors, I will speak to the "why" a DNA test may be important here.

 

Note! I am not speaking to this case at all, but in general terms only.

 

It is quite possible that consensual sex between "any number of individuals" could be a fact; however if the alleged victim was under the influence whereby she was incapacitated to a degree where she was not in control, and if after having consensual sex, she was sexually assaulted by some perpetrator and that perpetrator was to deny he had sex with her, this very well could be the crux of the matter.

 

Again, I am not speaking to this case but it was posed by someone earlier as to why a DNA test might be important. It also could be that once a rape claim is committed, it is the protocol that agency elects to follow.

 

 

That's all true. And I think a DNA test is part of a standard assault forensic exam that a person undergoes when a rape is reported. It's voluntary, but the person is encouraged to let them work through the rape kit to collect evidence. There might be a lot of uncertainty as to what went on. The rape kit can provide hard evidence to confirm parts of an allegation.

[StPaulHusker]

 

 

 

Not stating if I think anyone is guilty or not. I do have one question that if I heard it right I am not sure I understand.

 

The female mentioned that the rape happened between the hours of 2:30 sunday morning to 9:30 am. Why could she not narrow a time better down better than 7 hours?

 

If I misheard, please correct me.

It could have happened while she was asleep, then she woke up and figured out what happened. Or since they were at a party alcohol may have been involved.

 

I never buy that as an excuse. If you choose to drink then you need to understand that the things you do while under the influence may or may not be agreeable to you when you sober up, but it was YOUR decision to drink so you get to live with the consequences of your actions. (When I use the word you in this post, I don't necessarily mean you Moiraine.)

 

((Deleted outburst by elfkiller. Member banned.))

 

BOOM Edited November 19, 2015 by NUance
I deleted the inappropriate outburst by elfkiller which was quoted. Member was banned.

[TITANIC VS LUSITANIA]

 

 

 

Not stating if I think anyone is guilty or not. I do have one question that if I heard it right I am not sure I understand.

 

The female mentioned that the rape happened between the hours of 2:30 sunday morning to 9:30 am. Why could she not narrow a time better down better than 7 hours?

 

If I misheard, please correct me.

It could have happened while she was asleep, then she woke up and figured out what happened. Or since they were at a party alcohol may have been involved.

 

I never buy that as an excuse. If you choose to drink then you need to understand that the things you do while under the influence may or may not be agreeable to you when you sober up, but it was YOUR decision to drink so you get to live with the consequences of your actions. (When I use the word you in this post, I don't necessarily mean you Moiraine.)

 

 

Account banned for obvious reasons. BRI

Welcome to HuSkErBoArD!

[Red Five]

 

 

 

Not stating if I think anyone is guilty or not. I do have one question that if I heard it right I am not sure I understand.

 

The female mentioned that the rape happened between the hours of 2:30 sunday morning to 9:30 am. Why could she not narrow a time better down better than 7 hours?

 

If I misheard, please correct me.

It could have happened while she was asleep, then she woke up and figured out what happened. Or since they were at a party alcohol may have been involved.

 

I never buy that as an excuse. If you choose to drink then you need to understand that the things you do while under the influence may or may not be agreeable to you when you sober up, but it was YOUR decision to drink so you get to live with the consequences of your actions. (When I use the word you in this post, I don't necessarily mean you Moiraine.)

 

 

Account banned for obvious reasons. BRI

[BIGREDIOWAN]

I detect a slight amount of stalling here... getting ahead of the timeline questions with statements such as dna takes months. That tells me whoever is involved is dear to the program.

Whether you believe it or not, really doesn't matter, it does take months unless a rush is put on the kit by the crime lab. That very well may happen because of the names possibly involved, but in the grand scheme of sexual assaults it's not any different than any other one other than the names involved and those don't normally have a rush put on them. Murders and things like that get rushed. Quit trying to create a back story to create turmoil there.

[BigRedBuster]

Well, that escalated quickly.

 

I think everyone that is reasonable understands that any guy that takes advantage of a woman while impaired is a dirt bag and he deserves everything he gets. Just because someone is drunk doesn't mean you can do what ever you want with them and expect to not have ramifications.

 

However, back in my college years, I can think of more than one situation where BOTH the guy and girl were drunk off their asses, all over each other at a party, went home and screwed like mad till passing out.....and....at least one of them really regretted it the next morning.

 

Now, in an effort to give the benefit of the doubt, I took Elf's comments to mean a situation like this. When drunk, the girl gives permission. When sober, she regrets it.

 

It is a very very touchy subject. Honestly, any guy is smart to steer very clear of a woman who is impaired due to a situation like this. Help her home, don't do anything, say good night and call her in the morning for a date if you are still interested.

[Dbqgolfer]

The reason there may be not charges until DNA tests are complete could be as simple as the fact that the alleged assailant could recant his admission that they had consensual sex, if alleged assailant even made that admission to begin with. From everything I've read, TA was the only one who said "everything was consensual". We have no idea if the accused ever made that admission.